Ciaran Lynch Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Mellows

Campus, Athenry, Co. Galway.

• Established in the Autumn of 2008

• Part of Teagasc Response to the Malone sheep report

• Objective: establish focal points for implementation,

evaluation and demonstration of technology

• Goal to increase the productivity and profitability of the

sheep enterprise

BackgroundBackground

• Initially 3 hill flocks & 4 lowland flocks were recruited

• Farmers selected primarily on the basis of willingness

to improve their sheep enterprise and adopt

technology

• Each farmer willing to share detailed information about

their own flock

• Additional flocks were recruited in 2012

BackgroundBackground

Hill Flocks11 David Mc Laughlin22 Colm O'Donnell33 James Lally

Lowland Flocks11 David Mc Laughlin44 John Curley55 Brendan O'Sullivan66 John Kelly77 Brian Nicholson88 John Doyle99 Andrew Maloney

1

2

34

9

87

6

5

• Initial step in the programme to develop a 3 to 5 year plan for each flock

• Plan focused on a number of key areas:• Flock size• Farm layout• Breeding policy• Grassland management• Parasite control • Winter management• Overall flock management

• Aim to develop a more productive and profitable system for each flock

Farm PlanFarm Plan

• Vital to improve flock profitability

• Winter Management

- Closing date

- Extended grazing

• Matching lambing date to grass supply

• Measurement weekly to make decisions

• Manage to appropriate sward height

• Reducing paddock size

• Reseeding

• Ensure soil fertility is correct

• Improve silage quality

Grassland managementGrassland management

• Anthelmintic resistance is a serious issue facing the sheep industry

• Evidence for resistance on BETTER farms (Good et al.2011)

• Benzimidazole: all farms

• Levamisole: 2 farms

• Macrocylic lactone: no resistance found

• AAD’s: no resistance found

• Aim to implement a more sustainable system of parasite control

• Samples collected fortnightly for FECPAK analysis

• FEC counts used to aid dosing decisions

Parasite controlParasite control

Flock productivity - Lowland flocksFlock productivity - Lowland flocksSeasonSeason

National National AverageAverage 2008/092008/09 2009/102009/10 2010/112010/11 TargetTarget

Litter size 1.55 1.71 1.77 1.86 1.91.9

Ewes lambed (%) 92 90.2 93.8 97.3 >94>94

Lamb Mortality (%) 9 7.8 8 8.5 <10<10Lambs weaned per ewe joined 1.3 1.42 1.53 1.66 >1.6>1.6

• Output per ewe key driver of profit – Major opportunity to increase • Considerable improvements in 2 years• Benefits of breeding policy and better flock management

Lamb PerformanceLamb Performance

Aim to increase lamb performance in a cost effective manner

Lamb weaning weight (kg) on Lowland BETTER Farms  Season  

Birth type 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 Target

Single 36.5 37.2 37.7 >38

Twin 31.7 32.5 32.8 >33

Triplet 30.5 31 32 >32

• Focused on improving performance from a grass based diet• Reduced concentrate supplementation• Lamb performance has increased by 1.2, 1.1 and 1.5 kg for singles twins and triplets

Flock productivity - Hill FlocksFlock productivity - Hill Flocks

SeasonSeason

2008/092008/09 2009/102009/10 2010/112010/11 TargetTarget

Litter size 1.18 1.29 1.32 1.3

Ewes lambed (%) 88.2 79.5 95.9 >92

Lamb Mortality (%) 7.8 10.3 13.1 <10

Lambs weaned per ewe joined 0.96 0.92 1.1 1.1

• National average for Blackface flocks: 0.8 lambs reared per ewe joined

• Improve ewe weight and condition prior to joining• Guard against ram infertility

Lamb weaning weight (kg) on Hill Better Farms Season

Birth type 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 TargetSingle 23.9 28.0 27.6 > 21

Twin 20.9 24.1 24.4 > 25

• Focused on strategically using semi-improved areas• Produce crossbred lambs:

– 3 – 4 kg heavier than purebreds at weaning• Lamb performance has increased by 4.1 and 3.7 kg for singles and twins respectively

Financial performance Lowland Flocks (€ per hectare)

  Year  

2009 2010 2011

Gross output 857 1051 1271

Total Variable costs 567 520 540

Gross Margin 290 531 731

• Substantial improvement in financial performance• Gross output has increased by 48%• Variable costs have decreased by 5%• Gross margin has increased by 152%

46

335

679

290

80

382

749

531

731

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Bottom 1/3 Average Top 1/3 BETTER Farms

Gro

ss m

argi

n (€

per

hec

tare

)2009

2010

2011

E-Profit monitor comparison – Lowland Flocks

• Year 1 started below E-profit monitor average

• Significant improvements in 2 years – potential to increase further

Lowland Sheep BETTER Farms - Actual Gross Margin compared to Gross Margin if no productivity gains since

2009

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2009 2010 2011

Year

Gro

ss m

argi

n (€

per

hec

tare

) Gm/Ha - Actual

Gm/Ha - No Gains

• Revenue is kept constant in both scenarios• For No Gains scenario costs are inflated using the CSO index• Increased productivity contributed to 58% of overall increase

Financial performance Hill Flocks (€ per ewe)

  Year  

2009 2010 2011

Gross output 42.71 45.02 72.31

Total Variable costs 22.88 20.91 15.24

Gross Margin 19.83 24.11 57.04

• Substantial improvement in financial performance

• Gross output has increased by 69%• Variable costs have decreased by 33%• Gross margin has increased by 188%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2009 2010 2011

Year

Gro

ss m

argi

n (€

per

ew

e)

Gm/ew e - Actual

Gm/ew e - No Gains

Hill Sheep BETTER Farms - Actual Gross Margin compared to Gross Margin if no productivity gains since 2009

• Revenue is kept constant in both scenarios• For No Gains scenario costs are inflated using the CSO index• Increased productivity contributed to over 40% of overall increase

• Each flock has the potential to improve their own performance and

profitability

• Adopt a 3 to 5 year plan to address key areas influencing production

• On the BETTER farms significant improvements in productivity

• Overall Gross margin has increased by €400 per hectare on lowland

flocks and by € 37 per ewe on hill flocks

• The BETTER Farms are a resource for sheep farmers and each farm is

willing to share their results and experiences

Key pointsKey points

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of the farmers and their

families and all the Teagasc staff involved in the programme